www.eurogamer.net
^This.
Yes but also 70$ is nothing. How could 50-60$ work in 360/ps3 gen? People were buying new games in droves.
This has always been an entitlement problem IMO, people deciding that for x amount of money they need to receive x amount of hours in return; nobody cares about that shit for movies, the cost of entry for watching LOTR EE is the same as 90 minute animated children's movie; the mentality that's part of the reason why videogames keep being viewed as trivial children's toys by the masses, your money's worth should simply be whether you had a good time with it, not if you can get a thousand hours out of it.
Everyone shit on Aveum and honestly I don't know why (besides it being an EA game etc etc). For me it was a fun time, some exploration, cool magic based FPS action and it didn't overstay its welcome. It was just fun...and I have no issues recommending it.
Cut the bullshit, you can repeat it over and over it wont change those 2 games are mid at best. Maybe they should do good games? Because yes I played Forspoken and Immortal, they are both bad. You can like them, no problem with that but don't use them to make an argument "players don't buy single player games or new IP anymore" or whatever non sense. There is room for 7/10 games, but those 2 you choose are not 7/10. And I'm saying this as someone who loves 7/10 games like Just Cause.
Terrible art design (THE big turn off for me and many other), boring story, too much effects that make most of the fights unwatchable and OMG the game feel so slowwww. The puzzles are meh at best too. And I'm not even talking about performance/optimization.
Honestly...what is the last game you played? Couldn't these same comments be just as valid for a title you enjoyed?
I think it's a combination of those factors honestly. I don't think $70 alone is enough of a deterrent. People wanted value at $60 and $50 too. Hell, Neo Geo games were $100 a pop in the 90's. Point is, that expectation hasn't changed. Gamepass and by relation PS Premium, Games with Gold, PS+ monthly free games, Gamefly etc. has changed the expectations though for sure. Not just that though. Free to Play games also weighs on current expectations. Microtransactions, DLC...it all plays it's role. Remasters, Remakes push the needle in a specific direction too, not just on the players expectations but it provides a feedback loop for developers as well. Indie games, for the most part, remain innocent in this, but it's all a big melting pot that has brought us to where we are now.
Fuck off will you? I am tired of hearing this shit. Cut the bs? You think I am faking liking this game? Are you crazy? I am supposed to start disliking something I like? No.
That’s perfectly said! I envy your rhetoric lol.
First off, I agree with you. But the issue is MS doesn't see GP as that kind of service. MS would need a major reset of expectations on the number of subscribers if GP became a service for those games you never heard of but may wanna try. Game maybe a gem in waiting, or a complete waste of your time. That's a pretty hard sell to be honest. Even with the lower costs running such a service, not sure the take up would ever make it profitable.
That's because movies are all about 1.5 hours to 3 hours long. The range is small for all 10,000 movies ever released. And they are all the same price at theatres.
Pardon the bad metaphor but I think that as all things do, things tend to fall towards chaos if not upheld by an orderly force. In this example, Gamepass is chaos...people subscribing is the orderly force a way of maintaining said chaos. Eventually, things will come to a head and either side will prevail. Mind you, I'm not saying chaos is a bad thing. Chaos/Entropy is the way of the universe...it's part of the balance and is inevitable.
of course, it's not a secret people constantly want free shit, not sure what you're trying to say here, the value should still be what you got out of it, not if you get to watch 3 terrible movies for the price of one; as said I paid less for MK11 then I did for vanquish and it still wasn't worth it because the game isn't very good, I'd buy more expensive but shorter game over cheaper but longer game every time if the shorter game has the better experience.
And that's exactly the problem, if you had a great time there's no way you should ever feel "ripped off", it's that mentality that will keep games stuck as children's toys forever, especially with the sports games which are just the same shit every year.
Recently, in the range of 7/10 games I played stuff like Orc Must Die 3, BeamNG, SnowRunner, Shredders, DBZ Kakarot, The Outer World, The Quarry, Sniper Elite 5 and probably some more.
Because we're talking about a general consensus, and the general consensus of these 2 games is that they're not good.
What I criticize is that you use these two games as an argument of authority to say: players don't like new IPs blablabla, 7/10 games (more bullshit, yeah I'm saying it)
Here we are. "I know better than you". Sorry but no, I've been gaming for more than 25 years almost daily so I'd say I have a little bit of knowledge. And I don't play only 9/10 games and big AAA, one of my best experience is Just Cause which I install from time to time because I just love it and even JC2 multiplayer is dumb fun. This series is the perfect definition of a 7/10 game, I think we can agree on that. Again there is room for 7/10 games, I named some just on top of my head. It's just that Forspoken and Immortal are not as good as you think they are. And again you can like them, IT'S FINE!
Problem is you try to shovel your opinion to other in any thread that talk about (or not, like here) those 2 and defend them to a point that is laughable for real. Almost like you are on a crusade. Now of course I join you on the "everything is taken out of proportion nowadays". But it is how it is and plenty of 7/10 games are still very successful.
There still is.
Oh don't be, I'm not a
Appreciate the clarification!
Thats where you and most gamers differ. The trend is people playing quality games that have lots of content or replayability. Its no different than any other industry. People will gravitate to products that hit that magical sweet spot of price/quality/value.
not a good comparison, the microwave is a uniform experience, so its easy to judge one product being better than another, you can't really do the same with say NHL and Nier automata because they are two completely different experiences, however to pick NHL over and over again every year, instead of a new and unique experience with Nier, because it you'll spend hundreds of hours on NHL, for the same price, is just silly, myopic and just plain entitled. Now if you don't like Nier or games like it, that's fine, just like people who don't like scary movies will value them little if at all, but the value proposition shouldn't never bank solely on how many hours you'll get in return, because the experiences aren't created equal.
I never said this, or made this assumption, of course a game can be gigantic and also great, but that would just be a unique quality of said game and doesn't mean a shorter game can't offer a greater experience either, but this is lost on people who blindly stare at the amount of hours returned.
See again, you are trying to label your preference for short games over games with replayability and content. I'll take NHL over any Vanquish or Nier. Not only are some of my fav franchises like COD, Diablo and NHL quality games (usually), but they also arent shelved or sold after beating it over a weekend.
..Where? Maybe you're just blind because I never said so, I said a shorter game can offer a greater experience than a longer one, just that if you blindly stare at the amount of hours returned won't ever see this.
This is another misnomer, playing the same handful of maps isn't "tons of content", it's the same content with high replayability.
And then people complain why IPs are vaulted and not used, yeah it didn't sell because someone decided to buy another copy of their iterative sports game instead. This is why the value proposition based solely on hours returned is nonsense.
..lol, this says it all really, I think we're done here; good day.
Thats fine.
Or amped with tons of employees during the covid craze.
This is also a reflection on the lack of strategy those companies have overall. They hire when they can, and fire when it's convenient. They don't have a plan to break into a new market or genre or audience, they are simply hoping what they have work without theirs input.
Yup....when even a big name success like Hogwarts Legacy doesn't deter WB from going all in on GAAS multiplayer garbage you know we're fucked.
That's my point....if even fucking Harry Potter doesn't make them reconsider their stance on Singleplayer games then that's it,nothing will.
I've been harping on this trend for a few years now. Just look at the top releases this year and next. Very few new IP's/ Basically all sequels, reboots, spin-offs remasters or remakes. Eventually they will run out of IP's to rehash. Heck even FF16, Diablo 4, COD BO3, and others all ended up being pretty mediocre. Publisher expectations and wanting $$$ NOW!! is ruining the creative experience. Indies will thrive cut the AA space needs to grow. AAA is pretty much a soul-less void going forward.
I'm not saying I disagree with you. I think we need more risk taking in this industry, but at the same time, devs should understand at this point that new IPs are risky. As such, devs and publishers should therefore budget themselves accordingly. Budget yourself to break even at, I don't know, a quarter million sales. That way you can make sure you stay in business and if your new IP is a surprise hit, it's a ton of profit.
Historically, gaming companies werent that profitable. Maybe Nintendo was always a big money maker with consoles and handhelds as a combo, but even if you went back 10 years, even the big third party companies barely made money.
I hear you, but i also think those who questioned the quality of said games are right.
Well yeah of course. That’s why these games are 7/10, maybe max 8 for the fans. But I still think the amount of fun and potential franchise starter power is there for some of these titles. Obviously not forspoken lol but maybe some other games
If you do something like that, every CEO, VP and hiring manager would hire hardly any employees and run the entire company with overworked skeleton crews who'll never get fired.
Maybe. I think it would be more of a risk management strat. I would also think the law would apply to company of a certain size within reason. I think my aim in thinking up this imaginary law is more to make sure execs are at least somewhat responsible for the mistakes they make. Likewise, I would like to see bonuses for maintaining certain levels of employment. Hiring alone wouldn't work because then there would be arbitrary hiring. That's a good point you make. It should go both ways. reward good behavior and accountability. Punish greed and the dodging of responsibility.
